Hall v. Missouri Pac. Ry. Co.
Court | United States State Supreme Court of Missouri |
Citation | 118 S.W. 56,219 Mo. 553 |
Parties | HALL v. MISSOURI PAC. RY. CO. |
Decision Date | 31 March 1909 |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Johnson County; W. L. Jarrott, Judge.
Action by Errett Hall, by next friend, against the Missouri Pacific Railway Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Martin L. Clardy and R. T. Railey, for appellant. O. L. Houts, Walter L. Lampkin, and Charles E. Morrow, for respondent.
Plaintiff, a boy of 14 years at date of accident, sues by his next friend to recover from defendant damages in the sum of $25,000 for personal injuries alleged to have been received through the negligence of the defendant in the operation of one of its freight trains. By the petition it is charged that the plaintiff boarded defendant's local freight train No. 122 at Pleasant Hill, Mo., to go to the town of Kingsville, a few miles to the east; that he had theretofore been accustomed and was permitted by defendant's conductors, agents, servants, and employés to board cars and to be carried thereon from one station to another, and assist them in handling freights and switching cars; then with reference to this particular occasion, and the alleged negligence of the defendant, the petition says:
That answer was, first, a general denial, which was followed by a special plea of contributory negligence couched in this language:
Reply, a general denial. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff in the sum of $6,000, from which, after the necessary but futile motions for new trial and in arrest of judgment had been passed upon, the defendant brings the case here by appeal.
The accident occurred September 22, 1902, at the town of Strasburg, as stated in the petition. At this town the defendant has three tracks, i. e., the main track and a north and south switch track. The main track runs to the south of the depot, the south switch track is south of the main track, and the north switch track north of the main track and also north of the depot. In other words, the depot stands between the north switch track and the main track. The east end of the north switch track is further east than that of the south switch track, and both some distance east of the depot. Actual measurements are given by one witness, as follows: The south switch leaves the main track 93 feet west of the point where the north switch track leaves it; at the widest point the south switch track is 9 feet from the main track, but the north switch track is further because it spreads out to go around the depot; the place of the accident was 15 feet west of the east point of the south switch; from the point of the accident to the first street crossing west was 16 rails or 48 feet; from the east point of the south switch to the window in the depot was 900 feet. These measurements are of but little value, save and except as they go to affect the credibility of the witnesses. There are three street crossings spoken of in the evidence, two to the east of the depot and one to the west. The first to the east runs just east of the depot.
From the evidence it appears that the plaintiff, rather an unruly orphan boy, being raised by his grandparents, had for some years been in the habit of jumping on defendant's freight trains, and in some instances riding from one station to another. He had been frequently notified by the station agent and by his grandfather of the danger of such conduct. He, himself, admits much of this conduct upon his part, and also some of the notices aforesaid. The station agent claims to have not only warned his grandfather, but the city marshal as well. He also claims to have driven plaintiff from the depot on several occasions, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Allen v. Kraus
...instruction and a proper one given on behalf of the adversary. Reardon v. Mo. Pac. Ry. Co., 114 Mo. 384, 21 S.W. 731; Hall v. Mo. Pac. Ry. Co., 219 Mo. 553, 118 S.W. 56. (22) Said Instruction 1 is not erroneous for containing the hypothetical clause that defendants "negligently removed a la......
-
Mullally v. Langenberg Bros. Grain Co.
... ... Langenberg Brothers Grain Company, a Corporation, Appellant Supreme Court of Missouri November 12, 1936 ... Appeal ... from Circuit Court of City of St. Louis; ... Springfield, 13 S.W.2d 552; Bobos v. Krey Packing ... Co., 317 Mo. 108, 296 S.W. 157; Hall v. Railroad ... Co., 219 Mo. 553; Stipitich v. Security Stove & Mfg ... Co., 218 S.W. 964; ... ...
-
Smith v. Terminal R. R. Ass'n of St. Louis
... ... Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis, a Corporation Supreme Court of Missouri" July 9, 1935 ... Motion ... for Rehearing Overruled July 9, 1935 ... \xC2" ... track at the place where plaintiff was injured. Hall v ... Railroad Co., 219 Mo. 553, 118 S.W. 556; Hufft v ... Railroad Co., 222 Mo. 286, 121 ... ...
-
Gilliland v. Bondurant
... ... 32358 Supreme Court of Missouri April 20, 1933 ... Appeal ... from Grundy Circuit Court; Hon. A. C. Knight , ... Galliger v. Kroger Co., 272 S.W. 1006; Hall v ... Railroad Co., 219 Mo. 553; Majors v. Ozark Co., ... 222 S.W. 462; Zasemowich v. Am ... ...